Brett R Gordon1, Cillian P McDowell1, Mark Lyons1, Matthew P Herring2,3. 1. Department of Physical Education and Sport Sciences, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland. 2. Department of Physical Education and Sport Sciences, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland. matthew.herring@ul.ie. 3. Health Research Institute, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland. matthew.herring@ul.ie.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The salutary effects of resistance exercise training (RET) are well established, including increased strength and function; however, less is known regarding the effects of RET on mental health outcomes. Aerobic exercise has well-documented positive effects on anxiety, but a quantitative synthesis of RET effects on anxiety is needed. OBJECTIVES: To estimate the population effect size for resistance exercise training (RET) effects on anxiety and to determine whether variables of logical, theoretical, and/or prior empirical relation to anxiety moderate the overall effect. METHODS: Thirty-one effects were derived from 16 articles published before February 2017, located using Google Scholar, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, PubMed, and Web of Science. Trials involved 922 participants (mean age = 43 ± 21 years, 68% female/32% male) and included both randomization to RET (n = 486) or a non-active control condition (n = 436), and a validated anxiety outcome measured at baseline, mid-, and/or post-intervention. Hedges' d effect sizes were computed and random effects models were used for all analyses. Meta-regression quantified the extent to which participant and trial characteristics moderated the mean effect. RESULTS: RET significantly reduced anxiety symptoms (Δ = 0.31, 95% CI 0.17-0.44; z = 4.43; p < 0.001). Significant heterogeneity was not indicated (Q T(30) = 40.5, p > 0.09; I 2 = 28.3%, 95% CI 10.17-42.81); sampling error accounted for 77.7% of observed variance. Larger effects were found among healthy participants (Δ = 0.50, 95% CI 0.22-0.78) compared to participants with a physical or mental illness (Δ = 0.19, 95% CI 0.06-0.31, z = 2.16, p < 0.04). Effect sizes did not significantly vary according to sex (β = -0.31), age (β = -0.10), control condition (β = 0.08), program length (β = 0.07), session duration (β = 0.08), frequency (β = -0.10), intensity (β = -0.18), anxiety recall time frame (β = 0.21), or whether strength significantly improved (β = 0.19) (all p ≥ 0.06). CONCLUSIONS: RET significantly improves anxiety symptoms among both healthy participants and participants with a physical or mental illness. Improvements were not moderated by sex, or based on features of RET. Future trials should compare RET to other empirically-supported therapies for anxiety.
BACKGROUND: The salutary effects of resistance exercise training (RET) are well established, including increased strength and function; however, less is known regarding the effects of RET on mental health outcomes. Aerobic exercise has well-documented positive effects on anxiety, but a quantitative synthesis of RET effects on anxiety is needed. OBJECTIVES: To estimate the population effect size for resistance exercise training (RET) effects on anxiety and to determine whether variables of logical, theoretical, and/or prior empirical relation to anxiety moderate the overall effect. METHODS: Thirty-one effects were derived from 16 articles published before February 2017, located using Google Scholar, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, PubMed, and Web of Science. Trials involved 922 participants (mean age = 43 ± 21 years, 68% female/32% male) and included both randomization to RET (n = 486) or a non-active control condition (n = 436), and a validated anxiety outcome measured at baseline, mid-, and/or post-intervention. Hedges' d effect sizes were computed and random effects models were used for all analyses. Meta-regression quantified the extent to which participant and trial characteristics moderated the mean effect. RESULTS: RET significantly reduced anxiety symptoms (Δ = 0.31, 95% CI 0.17-0.44; z = 4.43; p < 0.001). Significant heterogeneity was not indicated (Q T(30) = 40.5, p > 0.09; I 2 = 28.3%, 95% CI 10.17-42.81); sampling error accounted for 77.7% of observed variance. Larger effects were found among healthy participants (Δ = 0.50, 95% CI 0.22-0.78) compared to participants with a physical or mental illness (Δ = 0.19, 95% CI 0.06-0.31, z = 2.16, p < 0.04). Effect sizes did not significantly vary according to sex (β = -0.31), age (β = -0.10), control condition (β = 0.08), program length (β = 0.07), session duration (β = 0.08), frequency (β = -0.10), intensity (β = -0.18), anxiety recall time frame (β = 0.21), or whether strength significantly improved (β = 0.19) (all p ≥ 0.06). CONCLUSIONS: RET significantly improves anxiety symptoms among both healthy participants and participants with a physical or mental illness. Improvements were not moderated by sex, or based on features of RET. Future trials should compare RET to other empirically-supported therapies for anxiety.
Authors: Gary S Goldfield; Glen P Kenny; Angela S Alberga; Denis Prud'homme; Stasia Hadjiyannakis; Réjeanne Gougeon; Penny Phillips; Heather Tulloch; Janine Malcolm; Steve Doucette; George A Wells; Jinhui Ma; Jameason D Cameron; Ronald J Sigal Journal: J Consult Clin Psychol Date: 2015-08-31
Authors: Felipe B Schuch; Davy Vancampfort; Justin Richards; Simon Rosenbaum; Philip B Ward; Brendon Stubbs Journal: J Psychiatr Res Date: 2016-03-04 Impact factor: 4.791
Authors: Brett R Gordon; Cillian P McDowell; Mats Hallgren; Jacob D Meyer; Mark Lyons; Matthew P Herring Journal: JAMA Psychiatry Date: 2018-06-01 Impact factor: 21.596
Authors: Garcia Ashdown-Franks; Joseph Firth; Rebekah Carney; Andre F Carvalho; Mats Hallgren; Ai Koyanagi; Simon Rosenbaum; Felipe B Schuch; Lee Smith; Marco Solmi; Davy Vancampfort; Brendon Stubbs Journal: Sports Med Date: 2020-01 Impact factor: 11.136
Authors: Joseph Firth; Marco Solmi; Robyn E Wootton; Davy Vancampfort; Felipe B Schuch; Erin Hoare; Simon Gilbody; John Torous; Scott B Teasdale; Sarah E Jackson; Lee Smith; Melissa Eaton; Felice N Jacka; Nicola Veronese; Wolfgang Marx; Garcia Ashdown-Franks; Dan Siskind; Jerome Sarris; Simon Rosenbaum; André F Carvalho; Brendon Stubbs Journal: World Psychiatry Date: 2020-10 Impact factor: 49.548
Authors: Jasmin K Ma; Jennifer Leese; Stephanie Therrien; Alison M Hoens; Karen Tsui; Linda C Li Journal: PLoS One Date: 2022-02-03 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Pedro Lopez; Dennis R Taaffe; Robert U Newton; Laurien M Buffart; Daniel A Galvão Journal: Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis Date: 2020-11-20 Impact factor: 5.554